Biblical Language - MCWAY

[Decker]

MCWAY,  Sorry for the delay.  My Vacation ran into today. 

I started this new thread b/c you went cutnpaste happy in a thread about gay marriage when I mentioned the popular history in the US of slavery, miscegenation, and the oppression of women.  I opined that it sounded biblical and you went off like a Chinese firecracker with your Church lady nonsense about ‘context’.

Some context.  You (MCWAY) believe the bible is the perfect inerrant word of God Himself!  Which also means you believe in heaven, hell, the devil, demons, ghosts, demonic possession, the living dead, supernatural ‘miracles’, walking on water, parting seas, a talking snake, angels, talking bushes and so on.

Ephesians 5:22-24 (New International Version)
Wives and Husbands
 22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%205:22-24;&version=31;

Genesis 3:16 (New International Version)

 16 To the woman he said,
       "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
       with pain you will give birth to children.
       Your desire will be for your husband,
       and he will rule over you."


Would you please tell me why women are not subservient to men as these biblical quotes plainly state they are?

How about Slavery?

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear.  Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.  (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)


What about this? 

[MCWAY]

MCWAY,  Sorry for the delay.  My Vacation ran into today.  

I started this new thread b/c you went cutnpaste happy in a thread about gay marriage when I mentioned the popular history in the US of slavery, miscegenation, and the oppression of women.  I opined that it sounded biblical and you went off like a Chinese firecracker with your Church lady nonsense about ‘context’.

Some context.  You (MCWAY) believe the bible is the perfect inerrant word of God Himself!  Which also means you believe in heaven, hell, the devil, demons, ghosts, demonic possession, the living dead, supernatural ‘miracles’, walking on water, parting seas, a talking snake, angels, talking bushes and so on.

Ephesians 5:22-24 (New International Version)
Wives and Husbands
 22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians%205:22-24;&version=31;

Genesis 3:16 (New International Version)

 16 To the woman he said,
       "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
       with pain you will give birth to children.
       Your desire will be for your husband,
       and he will rule over you."


Would you please tell me why women are not subservient to men as these biblical quotes plainly state they are?

You forgot to post the rest of that passage from Ephesians 5, Decker.


Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church.

What that bascially means is that the husband to care for, love, honor, and (if necessary) GIVE HIS VERY LIFE for his wife. Your truncation of the passage to foster your claim of women submitting to men, no questions asked, is quite inaccurate.

Another reason why your claim is quite spurious comes from 1. Cor 7:3-5

The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

The husband and wife serve one another. Or, as a well-known pastor puts it, "The male submits to the woman's need; the woman submits to the man's lead".

How about Slavery?

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear.  Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.  (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)


What about this?  

I'll get to that in a bit!!

[loco]

The Bible saying that a wife should submit to her husband does not mean or imply in anyway that men are better, smarter than or superior to women.  It is simply a matter of rank, just like in the military.  We all know what happens when there are "too many chiefs and not enough Indians."  God has setup a hierarchy within the family for a reason:

1. God
2. Husband
3. Wife
4. Children

The children submit to both parents, the wife submits to her husband, while the husband, and all of the family, submits to God.  This does not mean that the husband makes all the decisions without consulting his wife and listening to her first.

Jesus Christ is a great example of this as he himself, being the son of God and being far superior to both of his human parents, submitted to them until adulthood.

If a woman does not like this arrangement, she does not have to marry a Bible believing Christian man.  Nobody is forcing her.  But I do know plenty of Christian women who believe in and want this arrangement, and they would not have it any other way.

Any man who interprets this as license to oppress women is misinterpreting and he is wrong.  Then again, some men are just sexist anyway and would like to use anything, including the Bible as an excuse to justify their attitudes and actions.

[MCWAY]

The Bible saying that a wife should submit to her husband does not mean or imply in anyway that men are better, smarter than or superior to women.  It is simply a matter of rank, just like in the military.  We all know what happens when there are "too many chiefs and not enough Indians."  God has setup a hierarchy within the family for a reason:

1. God
2. Husband
3. Wife
4. Children

The children submit to both parents, the wife submits to her husband, while the husband, and all of the family, submits to God.  This does not mean that the husband makes all the decisions without consulting his wife and listening to her first.

Jesus Christ is a great example of this as he, being the son of God and being far superior to both of his human parents, he submitted to his human parents until adulthood.

If a woman does not like this arrangement, she does not have to marry a Bible believing Christian man.  Nobody is forcing her.  But I do know plenty of Christian women who believe in and want this arrangement, and they would not have it any other way.

Any man who interprets this as license to oppress women is misinterpreting and he is wrong.  Then again, some men are just sexist anyway and would like to use anything, including the Bible as an excuse to justify their attitudes and actions.

True indeed.

Regarding the slavery stuff, as I stated initially, that is hardly the chattel slavery that we've come to know (ala black people in the USA). Furthermore, you again left off the rest of the passage, Decker.

And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.

Based on Jewish law, any mistreatment of servants resulted in punishment, ranging from the servant's release from his contract to (in severe case) DEATH of the master.

[loco]

And at the time when and at the place where this was written:

Ephesians 6 (New International Version)

Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, 8because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free.

9And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.

Slavery was still in existence and very much part of society.  This scripture is telling both, Christian slaves and free Christians, to behave like good followers of Jesus Christ in order to win as many as possible to Jesus Christ.  It neither establishes nor promotes slavery.

1 Corinthians 9:19
Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible.

1 Corinthians 7:21
Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so.

1 Timothy 1:9-11
9We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

[Decker]

You forgot to post the rest of that passage from Ephesians 5, Decker.


Genesis 3:16 (New International Version)

 16 To the woman he said,
       "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
       with pain you will give birth to children.
       Your desire will be for your husband,
       and he will rule over you."


Would you please tell me why women are not subservient to men as these biblical quotes plainly state they are?

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church.

What that bascially means is that the husband to care for, love, honor, and (if necessary) GIVE HIS VERY LIFE for his wife. Your truncation of the passage to foster your claim of women submitting to men, no questions asked, is quite inaccurate.

While those supporting lines you post of Ephesians are quite beautiful in their meaning, they don't change the plain language of Genesis 3:16:

Your desire will be for your husband,
       and he will rule over you."

"Ruling over" means ruling over.  It means a loss of dominion over the self.  Why? B/c another is ruling.

Another reason why your claim is quite spurious comes from 1. Cor 7:3-5

The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 

The husband and wife serve one another. Or, as a well-known pastor puts it, "The male submits to the woman's need; the woman submits to the man's lead".

As for Ephesians, it seems that the interpretation that submission of the woman to the man is consistent with the idea of the man ruling the woman.

Now you seem to assert that there is a circuitous meaning borne out by the notion of a H &W being of one flesh (spiritually).  In the material world, I would say that Genesis is still the prevailing rule.  I've always understood "marital duty" to mean sexual relations.  Your added text, in summary, means 'once you are married, stop looking for a piece of action outside the confines of marriage.  It doesn't diminish the subservience of the woman to the man nor does it change the primacy of order established in Genesis 3:16.

At least that's how I see it.

I'll get to that in a bit!!

Thank you for taking the time.  I appreciate it.

[Decker]

True indeed.

Regarding the slavery stuff, as I stated initially, that is hardly the chattel slavery that we've come to know (ala black people in the USA). Furthermore, you again left off the rest of the passage, Decker.

And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.

Based on Jewish law, any mistreatment of servants resulted in punishment, ranging from the servant's release from his contract to (in severe case) DEATH of the master.

Truncated or not, I don't see how you can deny the Bible's very clear and plain endorsement of slavery.  Again, the language you include does not change the plain language I cited.

You try to diminish the meaning of slavery by claiming it is really a type of indentured servitude but it isn't.  And even if it were, I.S. is still a type of slavery.  After all, some slaves were paid, all were 'remunerated' with food and housing.

[MCWAY]

Truncated or not, I don't see how you can deny the Bible's very clear and plain endorsement of slavery.  Again, the language you include does not change the plain language I cited.

You try to diminish the meaning of slavery by claiming it is really a type of indentured servitude but it isn't.  And even if it were, I.S. is still a type of slavery.  After all, some slaves were paid, all were 'remunerated' with food and housing.

I don't diminish the meaning, Decker. That's what the meaning is, based on the texts from Scripture and study of ancient Israel. Every 7 years, servants were through with their obligation. And, when they were released, they left with more remuneration than just food and housing.

Deut. 15:13-15, And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee.  And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty. Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: [of that] wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him. And thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the LORD thy God redeemed thee: therefore I command thee this thing to day. 
 

[Decker]

I don't diminish the meaning, Decker. That's what the meaning is, based on the texts from Scripture and study of ancient Israel. Every 7 years, servants were through with their obligation. And, when they were released, they left with more remuneration than just food and housing.

Deut. 15:13-15, And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee.  And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty. Thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: [of that] wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him. And thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the LORD thy God redeemed thee: therefore I command thee this thing to day. 
 

I'm not sure of what point it is you are making.  Are you stating that slavery/indentured servitude was a fact of life that had to be dealt with?

Wow.  I guess I was wrong.  The Bible is a vociferous critic of slavery.

What about the Genesis 3:16 quote about the primacy of man over woman?

[MCWAY]

I'm not sure of what point it is you are making.  Are you stating that slavery/indentured servitude was a fact of life that had to be dealt with?

I wasn't stating that (though, that was the case). That passage was in response to your claim, regarding indentured servitude and the type of remuneration received.

Wow.  I guess I was wrong.  The Bible is a vociferous critic of slavery.

It is a critic of what we know as slavery (namely, chattel slavery). Scripture strictly forbids kidnapping someone from another land, raping servants, abusing them, working them without adequate compensation, preventing them from advancing socially, etc.

What about the Genesis 3:16 quote about the primacy of man over woman?

What about it? It's basically emphasizing the hiearchy that Loco mentioned earlier, regarding leadership in the home. But, as Loco also pointed out, that is not a license for men to abuse or mistreat women, something that unfortunately far too many men have done.

[Decker]

I wasn't stating that (though, that was the case). That passage was in response to your claim, regarding indentured servitude and the type of remuneration received.

It is a critic of what we know as slavery (namely, chattel slavery). Scripture strictly forbids kidnapping someone from another land, raping servants, abusing them, working them without adequate compensation, preventing them from advancing socially, etc.

Yes, I recall a passage advising the master to not beat his slave/servant to death.

I fail to see how characterizing the Bible's obvious acceptance of slavery as OK b/c it really isn't chattel slavery.  But it really is, isn't it?:

Exodus 21:2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.

I mean the very essence of chattel slavery is purchasing human beings as property/chattel, right?  The slave is the property of the master, right?

What about it? It's basically emphasizing the hiearchy that Loco mentioned earlier, regarding leadership in the home. But, as Loco also pointed out, that is not a license for men to abuse or mistreat women, something that unfortunately far too many men have done.

Hierarchy?  So there is a pecking order of authority.  The man lords over the woman. 

Just like in the workplace, your boss lords over you, the worker.

Implicit in an order/hierarchy is concept of subordination.  Man over the woman.  It is not oppression when a man acts in a manner consistent with his dominant position over his wife, is it? 

I guess if the wife submits willingly it isn't...otherwise that sure smells like nascent oppression to me.

[big L dawg]

[Hustle Man]

Genesis 3:16 (New International Version)

 16 To the woman he said,
       "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing;
       with pain you will give birth to children.
       Your desire will be for your husband,
       and he will rule over you."


Would you please tell me why women are not subservient to men as these biblical quotes plainly state they are?

I just wanted to add to the interpretation of Genesis 3:16.

"Woman's desire for a man:Genesis 3:16 reconsidered"

Some theologians have suggested that, based on the usage and the Hebraic translation
of "desire" used in Gen 4:7, the woman will desire to dominate the relationship
with her husband. "The woman's desire is to control her husband
(to usurp his divinely appointed headship), and he must master her, if
he can.”


HM

[OzmO]

Ahh yes.........the proverbial can of worms